I am interested in it as a shared memory backend for parallel programming libraries (like parany).
Given the fact that the library was downloaded 18 times last month (thus indicating low use) I would say no, since that puts up more burden on ocaml-community. I’d rather have popular libraries there than a dumping ground of all kinds of unmaintained code. But I’m sure the author of would appreciate help with maintenance!
On the other hand, I think that Ancient is a useful tool in the OCaml ecosystem. Its low profile and lack of communication has prevented its use in scenarios where it may have been useful, and may have lead to a partial reinvention of its ideas and duplication of work. I think we should ask for the opinion of people who had a use for Ancient or similar technology before making a choice.
( @let-def ? )
I indeed have a “reinvention” of Ancient around with a few different design choices. I might be able to release the sources, I have to check.
I was planning to use ancient, or a revived version of it, as the shared memory
backend for parany:
I would like to get away from ocamlnet and manually manage semaphores.
By the way, I have asked Richard Jones by e-mail about transferring ancient to ocaml-community, but did not get an answer yet.
So far, the projects transferred to ocaml-community (with one exception) have been projects that are widely used and that I’ve heard of before. That one exception has been a bit of a problem. If we were to transfer this, it would be good to know that someone was committed to keep working on it.
Maybe a good first step to give more visibility to Ancient would be to add it to awesome ocaml.